(OT) : The Separation of Church and State in America Today -question-Is there a Place for Religion {Faith} in the American Political Process?
 

David Hartung wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 06:56:11 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

A question, if I may.

In you eyes, what is the job of an ordained minister?

Better to ask what they are NOT

First of all, using a tax exempt status to promote a
political action advocacy as an official of a church.

Why would this be wrong, in a moral sense?

Using my money against me?

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and Statein America Today.]
 

David Hartung wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.

There are restrictions in the IRS code, not in the Constitution.

....no law respecting...religion...

(OT) : The Separation of Church and State in America Today -question-Is there a Place for Religion {Faith} in the American Political Process ?
 

Billy Burpelson wrote:
BDK wrote:

My bad presidents:

1. G.W. Bush nobody comes close, a total embarrassment.
2. Jimmy Carter, worthless.
3. Nixon, a crooked *******. 4. LBJ..Vietnam.

You forgot that #4 also qualifies for a "crooked *******"...big time!


There is a straight line from LBJ and Viet Nam to today. The straight
line is called "Halliburton". The common denominator is one Herbert
Herbert Bush, the 41st President. He is a Nazi. So was his father and
grandfather.

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and State in America Today.]
 

David Hartung wrote:
Soumay Nonay wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Soumay Nonay wrote:
RHF wrote:
On Nov 29, 4:10 pm, wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 09:02:05 -0800 (PST), RHF

wrote:

- - American Needs a Flat National Sales Tax Now and
- - Needs to Abolish the Income Tax Now to Restore Our
- - Freedoms for All Americans.

- Sorry, but That would mean Bill Gates would have a LOT
- more "freedom" than anyone else.

D'Oh! - Bill Gates Presently Has A Lot More FEEDOM
then anyone else : Plus the Money to Buy More. ~ RHF

But under a Flat tax Plus System :
* Average American "The 90%ers"
Pay As You Spend Via a National Sales Tax
which in-fact Taxes the Chinese Made Product
at an Equal Rate as the American Made Product.
* High Income Americans "The 10%ers" with
Incomes above $250K : Pay the same National
Sales Tax as Everyone Else : Plus They Pay a
Flat Tax on All Income above $250K with No
Deductions.
.
And the flat tax would be regressive as hell. The wealthy
obviously favor it for a reason, it would clearly reduce their
taxes greatly, while making it tougher on the middle and lower
classes.

Republicans favor it for those reasons.
Where does it say that taxers must be "progressive"?

Where does it say that the poorest Americans must bear the greatest
porportionate tax burden?

The don't, and wouldn't.

Perhaps the wealthiest people should simply not have to pay taxes
at all?

When you decide to actually think, get back to me.

When you decide to stop being so Republican-ignorant, bring your argument.

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and State in America Today.]
 

Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.

There are restrictions in the IRS code, not in the Constitution.

...no law respecting...religion...

a la 1st Amendment

(OT) : Why a Flat Tax PLUS National Tax System Is Necessary ForAmerica's Future Financial Health
 

On Nov 29, 8:15*pm, "Soumay Nonay" wrote:
RHF wrote:
On Nov 29, 4:10 pm, wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 09:02:05 -0800 (PST), RHF

wrote:

- - American Needs a Flat National Sales Tax Now and
- - Needs to Abolish the Income Tax Now to Restore Our
- - Freedoms for All Americans.

- Sorry, but That would mean Bill Gates would have a LOT
- more "freedom" than anyone else.

D'Oh! - Bill Gates Presently Has A Lot More FEEDOM
then anyone else : Plus the Money to Buy More. ~ RHF

But under a Flat tax Plus System :
* Average American "The 90%ers"
Pay As You Spend Via a National Sales Tax
which in-fact Taxes the Chinese Made Product
at an Equal Rate as the American Made Product.
* High Income Americans "The 10%ers" with
Incomes above $250K : Pay the same National
Sales Tax as Everyone Else : Plus They Pay a
Flat Tax on All Income above $250K with No
Deductions.
*.

- And the flat tax would be regressive as hell.
- The wealthy obviously favor it for a reason,
- it would clearly reduce their taxes greatly,
- while making it tougher on the middle and lower classes.
-
- Republicans favor it for those reasons.

Soumay Nonay,

Yes a 'pure' Flax Sales Tax System is Phony-Baloney
and lets the Rich and Wealthy Escape Their Fair Share
of Taxes [.]

That's Why FLAT TAX PLUS Works For All : While a
Flat Tax Only -sucks- and Socks It To the Poor and
the Middle Class.

Under a Flat Tax PLUS System :
* Average American "The 90%ers"
Pay As You Spend Via a National Sales Tax
** YES 90% PAY NO TAXES and File No Tax Forms.

PLUS # 1 - Which in-fact Taxes the Chinese Made Product
at an Equal Rate as the American Made Product.

PLUS # 2 - High Income Americans "The 10%ers" with
Incomes above $250K
1st - They Pay the same National Sales Tax as Everyone
Else on Everything.
2nd - Plus They Pay a Flat Tax on All Income above $250K
with No Deductions. This Second Tier Gross Income Tax can
be at Any Multiple above Two (2X) of the National Sales Tax.

Example : A National Sales Tax of 17% results in at least
a 34% Income Flat Tax Tax for High Income Americans
with Incomes above $250K.

Lowering the National Taxes means reducing both down to :
National Sales Tax of 16% = 32% Income Flat Tax Tax
National Sales Tax of 13% = 26% Income Flat Tax Tax
National Sales Tax of 10% = 20% Income Flat Tax Tax

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and Statein America Today.]
 

Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.


If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its power
help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and Statein America Today.]
 

David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.


If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its power
help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.

NPR is content neutral.

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and State in America Today.]
 

"Dave" wrote in message
...
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.


If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its power
help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.

NPR is content neutral.

If you believe that, then I ought to call you Cleopatera.

Sir Charles the Curmudgeon

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and Statein America Today.]
 

Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.


If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its
power help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.

NPR is content neutral.

I beg to differ with you. I listen to NPR on a daily basis. They are one
of the most informative, yet left wing media sources on the radio.

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and State in America Today.]
 

David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.


If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its
power help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.

Now National Public Radio is equivalent to tax exempt churches? Political
commentary is not the issue. But you already knew that.

More off topic crap
 

All OT

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and Statein America Today.]
 

CharlesTheCurmudgeon wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.
If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.

If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its power
help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.
if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.
NPR is content neutral.

If you believe that, then I ought to call you Cleopatera.

You can call me whatever you like. Please provide refutation, if you
have any, to my contention that NPR is politically neutral. Please give
examples of NPR openly advocating a person or position, without
providing a discussion of the opposition.

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and Statein America Today.]
 

David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private relifios
organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.


If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its
power help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.

NPR is content neutral.

I beg to differ with you. I listen to NPR on a daily basis. They are one
of the most informative, yet left wing media sources on the radio.

"Left wing"? How so?

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and Statein America Today.]
 

Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private
relifios organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.


If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its
power help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.

NPR is content neutral.

I beg to differ with you. I listen to NPR on a daily basis. They are
one of the most informative, yet left wing media sources on the radio.

"Left wing"? How so?

Listen to morning edition commentary some time.

Listen to some of the so called experts they have on.

leftism is the rule of the day.

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and Statein America Today.]
 

David Hartung wrote:


Listen to morning edition commentary some time.

Listen to some of the so called experts they have on.

leftism is the rule of the day.

Commentary, by definition, is supposed to be subjective.

As far as hard news goes, please provide 2 examples of NPR manipulating
coverage to promote a person or position. If this practice is as
rampant as you claim it is this should not be difficult.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing 'Liberal'Propaganda
 

On Dec 1, 6:33*am, David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private
relifios organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.

If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its
power help shape that government. *That is a conflict of interest..

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.

NPR is content neutral.

I beg to differ with you. I listen to NPR on a daily basis. They are
one of the most informative, yet left wing media sources on the radio.

"Left wing"? *How so?

Listen to morning edition commentary some time.

Listen to some of the so called experts they have on.

leftism is the rule of the day.

NPR & PBS Bias # 1 Panels :

NPR's {PBS's} Un-Fair and Un-Balanced is having a
Liberal Activist Proponent and a Moderate {Me-Too
or Well-I-Don't Know} on one of their discussion panels.

What is Missing [MIA] at NPR {PBS} is a real honest
Conservative Activist Proponent who clearly articulates
the Right Perspective on Issues -versus- a Moderate
that is there only as window dressing.

NPR & PBS Bias # 2 The Host and Moderators :

There are All liberal, Liberal. LIBERALS !
= Slanted Questions
= Slanted Follow-Ups

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting
Left-Wing 'Liberal' Propaganda ~ RHF

-ps- paid for by tax free {tax payer} donations
which is de-facto us government support for a
left-wing 'liberal' propaganda.

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church and State in America Today.]
 

David Hartung writes:

David Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:

There are no constitutional proscriptions against private
relifios organizations engaging in partisan political activity.

If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.


If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its
power help shape that government. That is a conflict of
interest.

if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political
commentary. Such would be a great loss.

NPR is content neutral.

I beg to differ with you. I listen to NPR on a daily basis. They
are one of the most informative, yet left wing media sources on the
radio.
"Left wing"? How so?

David Listen to morning edition commentary some time.

David Listen to some of the so called experts they have on.

They have experts from all sides of every issue. Conservative,
liberal, libertarian. They are more balanced than any other
news outlet I am familiar with.

David leftism is the rule of the day.


--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)

(OT) : How Liberals Define : The Separation of Church andState...
 

I need to go pee right quick.(them girls in that online Irish newspaper
online, they used to say, Have you not peed yet?) It is cold and cloudy
outside, raining.That means it's going to turn colder.
cuhulin

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing 'Liberal'Propaganda
 

RHF wrote:
On Dec 1, 6:33 am, David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:
There are no constitutional proscriptions against private
relifios organizations engaging in partisan political activity.
If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.
If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its
power help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.
if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.
NPR is content neutral.
I beg to differ with you. I listen to NPR on a daily basis. They are
one of the most informative, yet left wing media sources on the radio.
"Left wing"? How so?
Listen to morning edition commentary some time.

Listen to some of the so called experts they have on.

leftism is the rule of the day.

NPR & PBS Bias # 1 Panels :

NPR's {PBS's} Un-Fair and Un-Balanced is having a
Liberal Activist Proponent and a Moderate {Me-Too
or Well-I-Don't Know} on one of their discussion panels.

What is Missing [MIA] at NPR {PBS} is a real honest
Conservative Activist Proponent who clearly articulates
the Right Perspective on Issues -versus- a Moderate
that is there only as window dressing.

NPR & PBS Bias # 2 The Host and Moderators :

There are All liberal, Liberal. LIBERALS !
= Slanted Questions
= Slanted Follow-Ups

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting
Left-Wing 'Liberal' Propaganda ~ RHF

-ps- paid for by tax free {tax payer} donations
which is de-facto us government support for a
left-wing 'liberal' propaganda.
.

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing'Liberal'Propaganda
 

Dave wrote:

RHF wrote:
On Dec 1, 6:33 am, David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Dave wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:11:12 -0600, David Hartung
wrote:
There are no constitutional proscriptions against private
relifios organizations engaging in partisan political activity.
If they are tax exempt under religious affiliation,
yep.
If an organization is subsidized by government it cannot use its
power help shape that government. That is a conflict of interest.
if that is true, then NPR must stop doing political commentary. Such
would be a great loss.
NPR is content neutral.
I beg to differ with you. I listen to NPR on a daily basis. They are
one of the most informative, yet left wing media sources on the radio.
"Left wing"? How so?
Listen to morning edition commentary some time.

Listen to some of the so called experts they have on.

leftism is the rule of the day.

NPR & PBS Bias # 1 Panels :

NPR's {PBS's} Un-Fair and Un-Balanced is having a
Liberal Activist Proponent and a Moderate {Me-Too
or Well-I-Don't Know} on one of their discussion panels.

What is Missing [MIA] at NPR {PBS} is a real honest
Conservative Activist Proponent who clearly articulates
the Right Perspective on Issues -versus- a Moderate
that is there only as window dressing.

NPR & PBS Bias # 2 The Host and Moderators :

There are All liberal, Liberal. LIBERALS !
= Slanted Questions
= Slanted Follow-Ups

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting
Left-Wing 'Liberal' Propaganda ~ RHF

-ps- paid for by tax free {tax payer} donations
which is de-facto us government support for a
left-wing 'liberal' propaganda.
.

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.

Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing 'Liberal'Propaganda
 

dxAce wrote:


Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.

Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.



Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing'Liberal'Propaganda
 

none wrote:

dxAce wrote:


Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.

Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know that that may be
difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim, toting crowd, but hey, give it a
try.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing 'Liberal'Propaganda
 

dxAce wrote:

none wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know that that may be
difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim, toting crowd, but hey, give it a
try.


That's what I thought. You hear facts and they make the people you like
look bad so therefore the facts are biased.

My Dad, a John Bircher Minuteman uber-right winger only listened to NPR
news, because of its objectivity.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing'Liberal'Propaganda
 

Dave wrote:

dxAce wrote:

none wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know that that may be
difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim, toting crowd, but hey, give it a
try.


That's what I thought. You hear facts and they make the people you like
look bad so therefore the facts are biased.

My Dad, a John Bircher Minuteman uber-right winger only listened to NPR
news, because of its objectivity.

Your Dad was confused. His genes were passed on to you. You are confused as well.

Like you, he probably woke up every morning retarded too.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations : The Thundering Liberal Slant-and- The Conservative Silence
 

On Dec 2, 5:30*am, none ""dave\"@(none)" wrote:
dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.

Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

Dave,

The NPR Thundering Liberal Slant :
# 1 - Travis Smiley is as Uber-Liberal
and Slanted as TV Host's come. ~ RHF
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing 'Liberal'Propaganda
 

In article ,
Dave wrote:

dxAce wrote:

none wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR
slanting news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a
few days, weeks, or months, to determine that NPR is THE
mouthpiece of the Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know
that that may be difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim,
toting crowd, but hey, give it a try.


That's what I thought. You hear facts and they make the people you
like look bad so therefore the facts are biased.

My Dad, a John Bircher Minuteman uber-right winger only listened to
NPR news, because of its objectivity.

I have the same opinion as DxAce but it depends on the program. As far
as I'm concerned the programming runs from center left to far left.
That doesn't stop me from listening as it can be entertaining to hear
commentators twisting logic so as to not offend liberal left
sensitivities while maintaining the appearance of being unbiased.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing'Liberal'Propaganda
 

On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 09:04:35 -0500, dxAce wrote:
none wrote:
dxAce wrote:
Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR
slanting news reporting to promote a political position.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know that
that may be difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim, toting
crowd, but hey, give it a try.

From the prospective of a FOKKKs news viewer, all the media will be
slanted. Perhaps you need a different perspective to make your judgments
from?

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing'Liberal'Propaganda
 

Telamon wrote:

In article ,
Dave wrote:

dxAce wrote:

none wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR
slanting news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a
few days, weeks, or months, to determine that NPR is THE
mouthpiece of the Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know
that that may be difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim,
toting crowd, but hey, give it a try.


That's what I thought. You hear facts and they make the people you
like look bad so therefore the facts are biased.

My Dad, a John Bircher Minuteman uber-right winger only listened to
NPR news, because of its objectivity.

I have the same opinion as DxAce but it depends on the program. As far
as I'm concerned the programming runs from center left to far left.
That doesn't stop me from listening as it can be entertaining to hear
commentators twisting logic so as to not offend liberal left
sensitivities while maintaining the appearance of being unbiased.

Exactly what they do. As you say, it's interesting and entertaining to listen to
their gymnastics. Heck, there should be an Olympic event for those folks.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing 'Liberal'Propaganda
 

dxAce wrote:

Dave wrote:

dxAce wrote:
none wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...
The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know that that may be
difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim, toting crowd, but hey, give it a
try.


That's what I thought. You hear facts and they make the people you like
look bad so therefore the facts are biased.

My Dad, a John Bircher Minuteman uber-right winger only listened to NPR
news, because of its objectivity.

Your Dad was confused. His genes were passed on to you. You are confused as well.

Like you, he probably woke up every morning retarded too.


At least he could stay on subject, and when challenged could produce
more than a personal attack.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing'Liberal'Propaganda
 

Dave wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Dave wrote:

dxAce wrote:
none wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...
The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know that that may be
difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim, toting crowd, but hey, give it a
try.


That's what I thought. You hear facts and they make the people you like
look bad so therefore the facts are biased.

My Dad, a John Bircher Minuteman uber-right winger only listened to NPR
news, because of its objectivity.

Your Dad was confused. His genes were passed on to you. You are confused as well.

Like you, he probably woke up every morning retarded too.


At least he could stay on subject, and when challenged could produce
more than a personal attack.

Rickmers, you are not worthy of anything more than a personal attack.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations : The Thundering Liberal Slant-and- The Conservative Silence
 

RHF wrote:
On Dec 2, 5:30 am, none ""dave\"@(none)" wrote:
dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.
Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

Dave,

The NPR Thundering Liberal Slant :
# 1 - Travis Smiley is as Uber-Liberal
and Slanted as TV Host's come. ~ RHF
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/
.
The NPR Conservative Silence :
# 1 - Every seen Rush Limbaugh on a NPR Panel ?
never, Never. NEVER !
.
.
building the listing one-a-day for many days ~ RHF
.

Tavis Smiley is on PBS, not NPR. The same PBS that runs the McLaughlin
Group and Tony Brown's Journal, Tucker Carlson, Bill Bennet, etc.

Rush Limbaugh is a clown. He doesn't represent any valid political
viewpoint and would screw-up any program he was on.

Once again, NPR is radio. You do not see people on the radio.

The subject is bias in NPR's news coverage. Which you cannot give two
examples thereof.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations Promoting Left-Wing 'Liberal'Propaganda
 

dxAce wrote:

Dave wrote:

dxAce wrote:
Dave wrote:

dxAce wrote:
none wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...
The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know that that may be
difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim, toting crowd, but hey, give it a
try.


That's what I thought. You hear facts and they make the people you like
look bad so therefore the facts are biased.

My Dad, a John Bircher Minuteman uber-right winger only listened to NPR
news, because of its objectivity.
Your Dad was confused. His genes were passed on to you. You are confused as well.

Like you, he probably woke up every morning retarded too.


At least he could stay on subject, and when challenged could produce
more than a personal attack.

Rickmers, you are not worthy of anything more than a personal attack.


Shut up.

(OT) : The "KKK" Insertion Rule - Bernard Peters You Are The K-Loser
 

On Dec 2, 7:37*pm, Bernard Peters wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 09:04:35 -0500, dxAce wrote:
none wrote:
dxAce wrote:
Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR
slanting news reporting to promote a political position.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know that
that may be difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim, toting
crowd, but hey, give it a try.

- From the prospective of a FOKKKs news viewer,
- all the media will be slanted. Perhaps you need a
- different perspective to make your judgments from?

Bernard Peters,

You K-lose for the use of made-up word "FoKKKs"
with the implication of Racism and Bigotry of the
Letters "KKK" added to the Argument.

This is the 'KKK' Insertion Rule and the first one to
invoke the "KKK" K-loses the K-arguement Kause
they haven't got a Klue as to the K-issues or the
K-facts but they sure do K-know how to mindlessly
K-name Kall someone else : K-which simply shows
their own inner bias and distorted sense of reality.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations : The Thundering Liberal Slant-and- The Conservative Silence
 

On Dec 2, 11:08*am, RHF wrote:
On Dec 2, 5:30*am, none ""dave\"@(none)" wrote:

dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.

Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

Dave,

The NPR Thundering Liberal Slant :
# 1 - Travis Smiley Show -host- Travis Smiley
is as Uber-Liberal and Slanted as TV Host's come.
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/
# 2 - "Democracy Now" -host- Amy Goodman
Amy is Hillary on Socialist Steroids and Liberal Speed
http://www.democracynow.org/about
*.
The NPR Conservative Silence :
# 1 - Every seen Rush Limbaugh on a NPR Panel ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh
never, Never. NEVER !
# 2 - Every seen Sean Hannity on a NPR Panel ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Hannity
never, Never. NEVER !
*.
*.
building the listing one-a-day for many days ~ RHF
http://www.npr.org/programs/
*.

NPR 2400+ "Public" Radio Stations : The Thundering Liberal Slant-and- The Conservative Silence
 

On Dec 3, 5:25*am, Dave wrote:
RHF wrote:
On Dec 2, 5:30 am, none ""dave\"@(none)" wrote:
dxAce wrote:

Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR slanting
news reporting to promote a political position.
Rickmers, one only has to do a bit of critical listening over a few days, weeks,
or months, to determine that NPR is THE mouthpiece of the
Liberal/Democrat/Marxists.
Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

Dave,

The NPR Thundering Liberal Slant :
# 1 - Travis Smiley is as Uber-Liberal
and Slanted as TV Host's come. ~ RHF
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/
*.
The NPR Conservative Silence :
# 1 - Every seen Rush Limbaugh on a NPR Panel ?
never, Never. NEVER !
*.
*.
building the listing one-a-day for many days ~ RHF
*.

- Tavis Smiley is on PBS, not NPR. *

The NPR Radio program of The Tavis Smiley Show
concluded broadcasting on NPR December 16, 2004.
http://www.npr.org/templates/station...dule/?prgId=14

The same PBS that runs the McLaughlin Group and
Tony Brown's Journal, Tucker Carlson, Bill Bennet, etc.

D'Oh! - None of which is on the NPR Radio [.]

Once Again Proving My Point that NPR has a decided
Liberal Slant and Biased Against Conservatives.

dave - tyvm ~ RHF

(OT) : The "KKK" Insertion Rule - Bernard Peters You Are TheK-Loser
 

On Dec 3, 10:17*am, Bernard Peters wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:07:41 -0800, RHF wrote:
On Dec 2, 7:37*pm, Bernard Peters wrote:
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 09:04:35 -0500, dxAce wrote:
none wrote:
dxAce wrote:
Well, Mr. Butt-inski, maybe you can provide 2 examples of NPR
slanting news reporting to promote a political position.

Surely YOU can provide 2 examples...

The examples are there, just do a bit of critical listening. I know
that that may be difficult for the knuckle dragging, I'm a victim,
toting crowd, but hey, give it a try.

- From the prospective of a FOKKKs news viewer, - all the media will be
slanted. Perhaps you need a - different perspective to make your
judgments from?


- - Bernard Peters,
- - You K-lose for the use of made-up word "FoKKKs"
- - with the implication of Racism and Bigotry of the
- - Letters "KKK" added to the Argument.

- But, like a typical republiCANT,
- you missed the f&*king message!

BP - More 'typical' make-up words : "republiCANT"
and talk about "you missed the f&*king message!"
* Can't Talk About The C-Issues
* Can't Deal With The C-Facts
Instead Make-Up Words and Resort to C-Name C-Calling.

You K-lose for the use of made-up word "FoKKKs"
with the implication of Racism and Bigotry of the
Letters "KKK" added to the Argument.

This is the 'KKK' Insertion Rule and the first one to
invoke the "KKK" K-loses the K-arguement Kause
they haven't got a Klue as to the K-issues or the
K-facts but they sure do K-know how to mindlessly
K-name Kall someone else : K-which simply shows
their own inner bias and distorted sense of reality.

WINB "The OvercComer Ministry" on 9265 kHz @ 22:45 UTC
 

WINB "The OvercComer Ministry" on 9265 kHz @ 22:45 UTC
featuring Brother R.G. Stair
OCM = http://www.overcomerministry.org/
BS = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brother_Stair

WINB Shortwave Radio Station from Red Lion, PA -USA-
WINB = http://www.winb.com/

WINB Program Schedule by Time and Frequency
http://www.winb.com/schedule.htm
0630 - 0800 UTC on 9265 kHz
0800 - 1700 UTC on 13,570 kHz
1700 - 1800 UTC on 11,520 kHz
1800 - 2300 UTC on 9265 kHz

WINB Program Schedule by Title with Links
http://www.winb.com/bypgmsch.htm

Contact Shortwave Radio Station WINB
http://www.winb.com/contact.htm

FCC "B08" Winter 2008/2009 Shortwave Radio Broadcasting
Frequencies & Times for US Licensed Shortwave Radio Stations
http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sand/neg/hf_web/B08FCC01.TXT

(OT) : DX Acer @ gMail.Com = NNTP-Posting-Host : 12.154.10.254
 

(OT) : DX Acer @ gMail.Com = NNTP-Posting-Host : 12.154.10.254

The Separation of Church and State in America Today.,
 

It is not Unique to America, The Nazi party under Hitler
and the Japanese under hirohito declared they too were doing GOD'S bidding
and had GOD's Authority.
Jesus said we are pilgrims and strangers, yjat have no continueing City
but nobody ever claimed that republicans ever understood just what in
the heck Jesus was talking about,


Kurt_Lochner wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Kurt_Lochner wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Kurt_Lochner wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Kurt_Lochner wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
Kurt_Lochner wrote:
David Hartung wrote:
wrote:
David Hartung deleted and then
bleated:
- - - - - - - - - - - -
The claim was that Robertson, Falwell and Dobson have
claimed that Republicans have the corner on Christianity.
You are again dishonestly trying to reframe what was said..
From earlier in the thread:
Soumay Nonay wrote:

"I've been told the Republican Party has exclusive franchise
on Christianity; it is easier for a camel to pass through
the eye of a needle than a non-Republican to enter the Kingdom
of God."
So you don't agree with the observation that Robertson, Falwell
and Dobson's alleged "churches" are predominantly involved in
politics, particularly the Republican party?

How quaint..
May I once again suggest that yo learn to read?
No.. May I again suggest that "yo" learn to proof-read?
Point taken.
Good.. You've made several typos which I could almost
qualify as Freudian Slips in the past 72 hours..

your understanding of the quote I provided is completely wrong.
Nope, the context which you're trying to misrepresent that quote
with is lacking a few details that I find amusing..

--And typical of a right-wing zealot..
From what I see, you are making excuses.

No, you're the one making excuses, David. You've again
deliberately tried to 'reframe' this discussion to suit your
opinion, rather than openly discussing how the churches led by
Dobson, Falwell and Robertson (eg "Moral Majority", "religious
right") have violated the separation of church and state..
How can a provate entity, which has zero legal authority,
violate the constitution?

It's not a "provate entity", David..

Focus on the Family is a multi-media empire now..

You're even blindly assuming that these 'religious' figures
haven't been trying to build themselves 'empires' that have
attempted to force the Republican party candidates to accept
some of Dobson, Robertson, et al's religious agenda..
In truth, I am absolutely convinced that Robertson and Falwell
would like to build a religious empire, with them in charge.

And so, you think that they haven't? How did you conclude that?

Perhaps I should have been more explicit.

I believe that these men, and others like them would like to return to
the days when the temporal government was subservient to the Church,
and they would like to be the one in charge of the Church.

In Dobson's case, I am a little more uncertain.

Henh! Heisenberg didn't come into play here, right?

If you're going to quibble those facts, then you're not only
being dishonest with me, you're being dishonest with yourself..
The original claim was not that these men are building empires,
but that the Republicans had the corner on Christianity,

Ask yourself this.. How many non-christians are involved
in the Republican party? Are they a majority, or a minority..

From what I have seen, non-Christians are a majority of both parties.